Did the sneaky S.O.B scamera get me?
Discussion
I was told by the guy who pulled me over (in a similar area) that if I'd been doing under 75mph (in the 60mph NSL) then he wouldn't have even put his sandwich down to take a note of my reg.
As it was, he took 10mph off the peak figure (so just inside his fixed penalty limit) for being a good boy and slowing down as soon as I'd completed my overtake...of a knobber in a 6-series who'd suddenly decided that his 40mph Sunday drive was too slow, just as I started to become level with him on my overtake. He must have got to about 70mph before he realised I really, really, really wanted to overtake him.
As it was, he took 10mph off the peak figure (so just inside his fixed penalty limit) for being a good boy and slowing down as soon as I'd completed my overtake...of a knobber in a 6-series who'd suddenly decided that his 40mph Sunday drive was too slow, just as I started to become level with him on my overtake. He must have got to about 70mph before he realised I really, really, really wanted to overtake him.
It's quite conceivable that the safer groups are more likely to acquire points. For one thing, distance driven per year tends to increase with age. "The safest groups get the most points" does not necessarily imply "the safest individuals within groups get the most points". So a 45 year old with 3 points may well pay more for his insurance than he would if he did not have them, but it will still be less than a 19 year old with a clean licence.
I got done for speeding in July on my motorbike. Was it dangerous? Probably not. Did I know the posted limit? Yes. Did I make a conscious decision to exceed the limit? Yes. Did I see the unmarked Police car that pinged me? No. Did I make a song and dance about it when I got stopped? No. Did I try to play the "International Disco Pass/Get out of Jail free" card? No. Did I pay the fine? Yes.
I was speeding. I chose to speed. I got caught. Tough s
t to me.
The only plus point was it was in Finland, so no points. It was a €580 fine though.
I was speeding. I chose to speed. I got caught. Tough s
t to me. The only plus point was it was in Finland, so no points. It was a €580 fine though.
turbobloke said:
Possibly, if the omnipotent and infallible State says speeding is dangerous i.e. it's dangerous to exceed a speed limit regardless of whether the limit is a loony limit and regardless of the specific conditions,
I'm sure you will be relieved when I inform you that the state has never said that, nor has it ever claimed to be omnipotent and infallible.ChemicalChaos said:
So, I was driving home today on the A49 from Whitchurch north to Tarporley. As its a nice, wide, smooth and flowing road, and the weather was dry and sunny, I was driving to the conditions and making progress nudging the speed limit.
As I was actually concentrating on the road and driving smoothly, not fixated on my dashboard, I may have gone a few mph over the limit once or twice when accelerating out of corners or up inclines. To this end, I crested the brow of a hill on a perfectly straight stretch to see a mobile scamera van nestled on the leeside with the cameras out - I immediately glanced down and saw that I was doing an indicated 67-68, having accelerated to maintain momentum. I'll hold my hands up to that one because, as said, I was actually looking where I was going instead.....
.....anyway, my question is - given that a indicated 68 is likely to be 64-65, which is within 10% of 60, can I expect a ticket or have I escaped by the skin of my teeth? How strict are the scamera vans - do they operate to gatso tolerances or are they manned by "OMG speed kills think of the children" types?
I have so far managed 5 years of driving with a clean licence and I have no desire to get points now....
No need to accelerate to 'maintain momentum' just maintain your speed.As I was actually concentrating on the road and driving smoothly, not fixated on my dashboard, I may have gone a few mph over the limit once or twice when accelerating out of corners or up inclines. To this end, I crested the brow of a hill on a perfectly straight stretch to see a mobile scamera van nestled on the leeside with the cameras out - I immediately glanced down and saw that I was doing an indicated 67-68, having accelerated to maintain momentum. I'll hold my hands up to that one because, as said, I was actually looking where I was going instead.....
.....anyway, my question is - given that a indicated 68 is likely to be 64-65, which is within 10% of 60, can I expect a ticket or have I escaped by the skin of my teeth? How strict are the scamera vans - do they operate to gatso tolerances or are they manned by "OMG speed kills think of the children" types?
I have so far managed 5 years of driving with a clean licence and I have no desire to get points now....
singlecoil said:
turbobloke said:
Possibly, if the omnipotent and infallible State says speeding is dangerous i.e. it's dangerous to exceed a speed limit regardless of whether the limit is a loony limit and regardless of the specific conditions...
I'm sure you will be relieved when I inform you that the state has never said that, nor has it ever claimed to be omnipotent and infallible.https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/think-s...
That's close enough if not spot on in terms of the State's message to its sheeple.
otolith said:
It's quite conceivable that the safer groups are more likely to acquire points. For one thing, distance driven per year tends to increase with age. "The safest groups get the most points" does not necessarily imply "the safest individuals within groups get the most points". So a 45 year old with 3 points may well pay more for his insurance than he would if he did not have them, but it will still be less than a 19 year old with a clean licence.
Nobody is disputing that. But the assertion that points make you a safer driver can only be tested when all other factors are the same. So, is a 45 yr old with points a safer driver than a 45 year old without? Or is a 19 y/o with points a safer driver than a 19 y/o without.Of course they bloody aren't.
turbobloke said:
singlecoil said:
turbobloke said:
Possibly, if the omnipotent and infallible State says speeding is dangerous i.e. it's dangerous to exceed a speed limit regardless of whether the limit is a loony limit and regardless of the specific conditions...
I'm sure you will be relieved when I inform you that the state has never said that, nor has it ever claimed to be omnipotent and infallible.https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/think-s...
That's close enough if not spot on in terms of the State's message to its sheeple.
2) Nowhere near close enough to prove your earlier point, especially as it concentrates on excessive speed rather than speed limits.
TwigtheWonderkid said:
otolith said:
It's quite conceivable that the safer groups are more likely to acquire points. For one thing, distance driven per year tends to increase with age. "The safest groups get the most points" does not necessarily imply "the safest individuals within groups get the most points". So a 45 year old with 3 points may well pay more for his insurance than he would if he did not have them, but it will still be less than a 19 year old with a clean licence.
Nobody is disputing that. But the assertion that points make you a safer driver can only be tested when all other factors are the same. So, is a 45 yr old with points a safer driver than a 45 year old without? Or is a 19 y/o with points a safer driver than a 19 y/o without.Of course they bloody aren't.
He actually said;
"Studies have shown that it's the statistically safer drivers who are the vast majority with points on their licence."
That is entirely possible.
singlecoil said:
turbobloke said:
singlecoil said:
turbobloke said:
Possibly, if the omnipotent and infallible State says speeding is dangerous i.e. it's dangerous to exceed a speed limit regardless of whether the limit is a loony limit and regardless of the specific conditions...
I'm sure you will be relieved when I inform you that the state has never said that, nor has it ever claimed to be omnipotent and infallible.https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/think-s...
That's close enough if not spot on in terms of the State's message to its sheeple.
2) Nowhere near close enough to prove your earlier point, especially as it concentrates on excessive speed rather than speed limits.
1) Exactly, an easy pisstake to make
2) "...illustrates why speed limits, particularly the 30 miles per hour (mph) limit exist"..."It’s 30 for a reason"..."keep to the speed limit"...
Sure it starts well with one mention of conditions, and an appropriate is thrown in later on, but to say or imply it doesn't concentrate on limits is something one might expect if the link was read with Es and speed.
otolith said:
"Studies have shown that it's the statistically safer drivers who are the vast majority with points on their licence."
That is entirely possible.
It sure is possible. Statistically the safest drivers on the roads drive at the 85th %ile of speed. Today's limits are increasingly slow for reasons concerned with poetry (twenty is plenty) and mantras (kill your speed) rather than apt road safety prioritisation in which speed enforcement would have an appropriately minor role - this has led, and will continue to lead, to the criminalisation of safe behaviour.That is entirely possible.
swerni said:
Breadvan72 said:
Can you see me on your version of the internet? Cool! All I can see is a boring blue and grey thing,with some pictures of cars at the bottom.
Don't be factious, it doesn't become you. 
You just come across as significantly older
(If he's seen the photo, that might explain why he is traumatised.)
ChemicalChaos said:
I crested the brow of a hill on a perfectly straight stretch to see a mobile scamera van nestled on the leeside with the cameras out -
You must have still been in Shropshire. In Cheshire the van would have been hidden and the camera operator would be positioned to be least visible.If your recollection of the speed is accurate then you should be OK. You'd get a letter at a true 68. Cresting a hill over the limit is asking for trouble - as mentioned earlier in the thread, you see a nice bit of road, they see a revenue opportunity.
About a week to go for mine too -
Travelling back up the M40 - camera van parked up on a bridge - was doing approx 80 on speedo, indicated 76-77 on SatNav quickly dropping to 72.
Cutting it fine is an understatement
Was an unfortunate biker a way behind who was really flying, 90 or so at a guess, he knew he'd been caught out and proceeded to punch his helmet!
Travelling back up the M40 - camera van parked up on a bridge - was doing approx 80 on speedo, indicated 76-77 on SatNav quickly dropping to 72.
Cutting it fine is an understatement
Was an unfortunate biker a way behind who was really flying, 90 or so at a guess, he knew he'd been caught out and proceeded to punch his helmet!
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff